Prof. H ... So how do you generate a weekly journal mark?

Well, I am pretty much bound by the syllabus on this one. I read the submitted selection and assign +/0/- marks (+ better than average, 0 average, and - poorer than average) on my assessment of:
- how well what was submitted conforms to the form and format detailed in the syllabus
- content and completeness
- utility (how useful will the submitted journal be when the student has a final exam and needs to use the journal as a reference for the source material).

I then make overall assessments

Generally if I am convinced that the student read and understood the source then the student will get 5/10 just for that. The other elements: form/format and content will pretty much give the remainder of the mark.

The journals from week 1 were marked Thursday but I forgot to pass them back (and in fact I was hoping that some missing journal selections would be coming in). My overall reflections on what has been submitted so far:

- please refer to the syllabus for form and format requirements
- there seems to be an issue concerning content. In a summary that is faithful to the source material I was expecting a) points made by the source b) logic and narrative (how were the points in the source connected) and c) globally key concepts and expressions. It would appear that a significant number of you are going straight to c) and in the process have caused a problem with differentiation of the positions contained in the source and your own interpretation. The danger in this is that it may be difficult in the final exam to recover what the actual source was saying.
- some of you have chosen an essay / paragraph style of summary that does indeed show that you read and understood the source but really ... how useful will that be in the final exam when you are going to be trying to find something from the source quickly? I mean, are you going to read your whole journal to find what you are looking for? On the utility question I think you need some running titles and structure to your summaries so that you can quickly go the to points in the source that you are looking for.
- there is an issue with quotes and some of you need to make sure of the source of the quotes that you select.
- discrimination is a point as well. You can report the line of argument from a source but if you give equal space to an example that the source used it shows that you are giving too much emphasis on secondary content.
- a diagram is a diagram not a scan of a page from the source.

Prof. H ... So how do you generate a weekly subjective evaluation mark?

Good question.

After each RS 3853 lecture I go over my notes and assign marks for each student based on attendance / attention, participation and quality of participation.

So far (and I may tweek this as I go along this semester) this has been:
attendance / attention out of 4
participation out of 3
quality out of 3

So the total weekly sub. eval. mark is out of 10.

This means that an average student that attends class (on time), pays attention and makes some contribution to class is most likely to get 4 + 1.5 + 1.5 = 7/10. That is pretty much how I have done it so far. Students that make online contributions will get marks added to the global subjective evaluation based on the last two criteria.

Found this interesting

I checked my old files and pulled out this obituary for Francis Crick and there was an interesting insight towards the end about the relationship between Rosalyn Franklin and the Cricks towards the end of her life. You might find it interesting also.

Link to Globe and Mail Obituary for Francis Crick

Open Thread: Week 3 Mind and Method

So this week was about the method and philosophy of Science. To look at these issues we focussed on the sterile definitions of the Wikipedia citations and the raw emotion of the methods and philosophies in conflict as portrayed in the video "The Race for the Double Helix" mostly confirmed by the NOVA documemtary "The Secret of Photo 51". We saw revealed a number of methods of doing scientific work but the conflict was a result of the Baconian (inductive) or Cartesian (deductive) philosophy that worked in each scientist.

I made reference to a phrase (it sounds better in the original Klingon):

"Science knows only one commandment: contribute to Science"
Bertolt Brecht

Open Thread: Week 2 Poole

Our discussions this week focused on Michael Poole's short book "Science and Belief". It allowed us to discuss the general range of topics that are part of the Faith and Science discussion.

There were several points where comments were made that the bias of Poole was showing and it is important to a) detect author bias and b) to be able to NOT condemn a position that you may not agree with. It was suggested that Poole appears to be a theistic evolutionist and if you strongly feel that is a wrong position then it can stop your ears to the logic that the author is attempting to create.

As the quote on my door says:

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it" Aristotle

Open Thread: Lecture 1 Paul and Elder / Water

Post lecture comments re:

1) Paul and Elder "Critical Thinking"
2) Water "Bible and Science"

This is an open thread giving students an opportunity to contribute to the class discussion. Students that have comments on the material covered in the lecture or have come across any references that may be related to the topics discussed (related online links, journal / magazine articles etc.) should create an anonymous Blogger ID and make their comments here. For some students that prefer to not contribute to class discussion this may be the only way that they will be able to reach a passing mark for the 20% subjective evaluation.

Current Topics: Our Discussion on Art

We were discussing this morning our thoughts about the nature of art and if we could analyze art to the point of determining the intent of the artist. I happened upon this link that is tangentially linked to what we were discussing. It makes an interesting assertion about inevitable discovery in Science (as if all true things in Science will inevitably be discovered) thus making Science unique and separate from artistic thought (including beauty, insight and emotion).

Link to article